The Sun. — London, England, 1864-01-14 00:00:00

The French Legislative Assembly, The Legislative Body sat on Tuesday, Duke de lklorny in the chair. M. Rouher, Minister of State ; M. Rouland, Minister presiding over the Council of State ; and the other Govern- ment Commissioners were present. The orders of the day was the discussion on the Address. M. TRIERS—On a recent occasion I said that I should ask your permission to speak on:the internal politics of the country, and that I intended to avail myself of that oppor- tnnity to give some personal explanations on the motives which induced me to enter this Chamber. I know that great assemblies have more important business than listen- ing to what concerns individuals, but I feel it a duty which I owe to my fellow-citizens, who elected me without asking for a profession of faith, and towards my colleagues, whose confidence I should be happy to possess. (Hear, hear.) It is 34 ) ears since I first came within these walls, and in that space of time I have witnessed a rapid succession of events, men, and opinions. In the midst of this torrent, which seemed as if it would sweep everything before it, the social and political principles on which modern society is based have alone survived. There have been gloomy mo ments whether it would ever bo restored. At a later period liberty seemed to have disappeared, and yet order has been reestablished and liberty is about to revive. You must all have been struck with the fact that man himself, so small in the presence of great events, derives all his importance from understanding, great principles and faithfully adher- ing to them. I have always held three great prin ciples as the rule of conduct for every honest states man—national sovereignty, order, and liberty. I have lived in what is called the school of 1789, which believes that France has the right to choose her own government—l think she ought to exercise that sovereignty very seldom, but when she has pronounced freely, that de cision becomes a law to which individual judgments must yield. (Approbation.) :After submitting to the legal govern ment of our country there are two things which we are en titled to demand of it, order and liberty. Without order society is troubled and industry is paralysed. The rich can sometimes dispense with working, but society is a labourer condemned to toil for the daily bread of his children. (Hear, hear.) When order and occupation are wanting, society inclines to despotism. When liberty is absent, society suffers as much, but in a different way, and tends to revolution. Such are the principles which have constantly directed my political life. When the Republic was proclaimed I adhered to it, though it was not the government I preferred, and I added my efforts to those of the courageous men who defended order in the Assembly, Order was preserved ; France re turned to the monarchical principle, and I again submitted out of respect for the principle of national sovereignty, but I remained in retirement, and devoted my leisure to writing with sincerity the history of my country. (Elear, hear.) I should have passed the rest of my life in that work without regret, had not the decrees of November, 1861, and February, 1862, changed the situation. Till then you were here to discuss, with but little power to amend, the bills proposed by the Council of State. (Denials.) You voted the budget by ministries, and the supplementary credits could not be known to you till it was too late to exercise any serious con trol. The decrees above mentioned entirely changed this state of things, and though they do not confer all the liber ties we might wish, they are an earnest of further conces sions, and I am grateful to the Emperor for them. (Appro bation.) As it thus became possible to freely discuss the affairs of the country, I considered that abstention was no longer wise or dignified, or patriotic. I advised my friends to take the oath to the empire, but I confess that I myself felt some reluctance to leave my retirement. Bat it is a bad practice to give advice to others which you will not follow yourself ; and the reflection that no one could accuse me of personal ambition decided me again to enter on political life. My only ambition is to bring to this Assembly the tribute of my experience, to discuss the affairs of the country with a view only to the public weal, so that the closing years of my life may not be altogether useless to my fellow-citizens. (Loud cheering.) The PRESIDENT—M. Thiers, will you have the kindness to turn yourself, so as to be beard in all parts of the Chamber ? some members complain that they cannot hear you.. M. THIERS—From an old habit of speaking from the tribune, I am always tempted to face the assembly. The PRESIDENT—I spoke solely in the interest of those who do not hear you distinctly. M. TRIERS—After these explanations, which I would fain have made shorter, I come to the business in hand, and shall limit my observations to our internal policy, which ought to be the development of our institutions in the sense of a well ordered liberty. First, then, let me state what is our precise political situation; we have long lived under constitutions which, when once made, were declared to be unchangeable. We have now a constitution admitting of such improvements as time, a wiser innovator than man, may show to be advisable. The constitution says that when a change shall be recognised as beneficial, the Emperor shall take the initiative, and the Senate give its sanction. Several modifications have already been made in confor mity with this principle. The right of discussing the Ad dress has been granted to the Legislative Body, which can thus make known the wishes of the country. We have lately heard much of liberty; but are wishes serious which have been expressed on that subject. That point must be examined ; we must ascertain how far it would be wise to satisfy those aspirations, and to what extent the present constitution allows them to be realised. Those questions, gentlemen, are grave and delicate, but be assured that I s'aall respect all that ought to be respected, and that your confidence, in facilitating my task, will render it less peril ous and more useful. (Marks of adhesion.) History shows that France may sometime dispense with liberty, but only to afterwards return to it with almost irresistible force. At one time she was naturally forgetful of her liberties ; that was in 1800, after the terrible trials of the revolution. France had before her a wonderful man, who held everything in his own hand, and at one moment she appeared to have lost all thought of anything else. When, however, she saw one part of her armies precipitated into the burning gulf of Spain, and the other among the icy w astes of Russia, she began to reflect deeply and sadly, and regarded those liberties which she had too readily abandoned. On the 31st Dec., 1813, she called on the Emperor for peace, but her voice was not listened to. Some months after, the victorious enemy entered Paris, and France fell bleeding at the feet of the Bourbons. What did she demand for them ? Peace, and with it the liberty of which she then felt all the value. The Bourbons again disappeared, and Napoleon returned, and from him peace and liberty was demanded. The former he could no longer give, but the latter he granted fully and in good faith. Examples have been frequently borrowed from Napoleon when victorious and dazzled by success. I must be allowed to borrow one from him, when matured by misfortune. (Approbation.) Liberty at that period could not be tried under favourable circumstances. Waterloo removed all idea of it, and an immense reaction commenced in Europe against all the ideas of the Revolution. We were then young ; we sometimes endeavoured to murmur the word liberty, and the answer given was to point to the blood-stained scaffold of Louis XVI. Our reason was not, however, convinced, and we persisted in calling for liberty. In 182.5, 1826, and 1827 we were near attaining our object. We approached those obscure and perilous limits where the prerogatives of the Sovereign found themselves in presence of those of the country. Twice, under different forms, did that great question agitate the country, and two thrones fell. If I may be allowed to make a comparison I would say that the fatal question was for us what the Stormy Cape was for the navigators of the 15th century, who trembled on approaching it. John of Portugal, wishing to dissipate those vain terrors, changed the name of that formidable cape to that of Good Hope, and it was then happily doubled. God grant that our Stormy Cape may also change its name with equally good results I (Loud approbation.) I shall not speak rof our hours of agitation since 1848. We have passed through the Republic to come to the empire. The idea of liberty again disappeared ; an immense military re action: prevailed over Europe. Princes were assembled in Paris, in the persons of their representatives, to regulate the consequences of the glorious peace of the Crimea, and for the first time liberty had a Congress .for tribune and a diplomatist for speaker. That is what I call liberty of national representation. Public opinion, when it is once well known,becomes a guide for the acts of the Go vernment. (Murmurs and approbation.) In order to orga nize in the State that condition of liberty two means have been imagined—the Republic and Monarchy. In the former the chief of the State is changed every four or six years, and is responsible. The partisans of Monarchy also wished to reconcile with that form of government the condition of liberty, and they imagined the plan of making the weight of public opinion bear, not on the chief of the State, but on those who hold authority under him. It is between the latter and those elected by public opinion that the discus. sion takes place. The sovereign does not change, but the ministers may be subjected to the fluctuations of opinion, and we have thus a country which under a monarch placed beyond the reach of our discussions, governs by himself, according to hie own ideas. (Noise.) There are five con ditions of liberty which I call necessary, incontestable, and indispensable ; which of them do we possess ? Which re main to be achieved? Which ought we to have ? Those are questions that lam anxious to treat on. Individual liberty we have with one exception—the law of general safety. That law, it is true, only bears on one class of citizens, but when one citi zen i s a ff ecte d , a ll are th rea t ene d . That law moreover applies to circumstances which happily no longer exist. (Noise and interruption,) A Voicn—They have just been renewed. M. THIERS—I have too muc h respect for the Assembly to accuse it for any of its acts, but that law no ono can think of renewing, and the Gov ernment i tself has no such idea. The only question is whether it should be allowed to die a natural death in 1835, or cease to exist before that time. 'That must be left to the Government to decide on. I pass on to the second of these liberties I have called necessary ; I mean the liberty of the press. Gentlemen, if any man in France has suffered the inconvenience of that liberty, it is I. An illustrious statesman with whom I for a long time discussed and transacted the affairs of the country, M. Guizot, felt them as much as myself, but I am sure he would confirm mo when I say that the liberty of the press is necessary. (Noise.) I can:understand, with out approving, the principle of withholding such liberty. More than 20 years ago, when I turned my eyes to Ausfria, I saw a brave and well-disposed population, content to pro• to the whole world• The ground is covered with the re- secute commerce and agriculture, and to leave the task of governing entirely in the hands of others. The old King mains of the Governments which have been overthrown. They are called the representatives of ancient parties. I am one of them, and I ask permission to tear away the veil. Francis made himself popular by walking about in shabby clothes without any aide-de-camp, and talking to everyone he met ; and in that way he obtained a knowledge of the true state of his affairs. Stich was Austrian liberty 25 years ago, but I ask if there is at the present day any people on earth who would be content with it ? Speaking one day on this subject with the late Prince de Metternich, I told him that populations in general preferred embroiling their own affairs to leaving them to the care of others, and I added that they were in the right, for it was only by re peated trials that they could learn to transact them properly. But is it possible to refuse to a people a knowledge of their Tho mission which the country has given to those repre- sentatives of the old parties, is to discuss with impartiality public affairs, to watch over the finances, and to bring about useful reforms in the laws and institutions, That is how I understand the mandate confided to me. (Approbation.) I am convinced that the country has such a desire for true and wholesome liberty that the Government NI hich shall give it will be frankly and sincerely accepted by all. I have served an august family, now in misfortune, to whom I owe all the respect due to nobly supported trials, and the affec- ion due to those with whom I have passed the most bril- own affairs ? In this hall we are allowed full liberty of speech ; we may, if we please, blame in the severest manner liant part of my life. There is something which Ido not owe them, and which they would not ask of me—but which the pride of my heart gives them willingly—that of living in retirement, and not showing them the spectacle of one of their servants seeking the eclat of power when they are in exile. (Hear.) There is a last thing which I call Heaven the acts of the Government; but the journals which repro duce our speeches are not allowed to add a word of their own. Is there not here a great inconsistency ? It is as if a man should first tell a secret to ten persons, and then to an eleventh with a recommendation not to divulge it. By that system, gentlemen, the natural order of things is dis- witness they never have required, and never will ask of torted and the springs of government warped, In a State which has been completely educated, the press, fortunately, does not form public opinion; it is only the cause of public opinion existing. When the press exaggerates, the people draw in the rein, and the exaggeration itself ensures moder ation. Then the general opinion, which is only a pre liminary notice, is collected together by the national repre- mutation and carried to the foot of tha throne. It is indeed true that all this can only take place in a country whose education is complete; but it implies that our own education should at length be commenced. France cannot remain for ever in a perpetual infancy. (Noise.) We are told that the Government is ex ceedingly strong. That I believe ; I think its material force strong enough to defy the attack of any party. Then why not profit by present circumstances? 'When will the politieal education of the country be taken in hand ? me, and that is to sacrifice to them the interests of my coun try. (Approbation.) I therefore declare that if those liber ties of which I believe the country to be seriously in need are given to us, I shall accept them, and I may then be reckoned among the number of the submissive and grateful citizens of the Empire. Bat, gentlemen, if our duty is to accept, it is that of the Government to give what is necessary to satisfy the legitimate wishes of the people. It is with re spect that I ask it, not for myself, but for my country. Let it not be forgotten that France, scarcely awakened, and with whom the exaggeration of desire is so prompt, if she now allows it to be asked for in a deferential and respectful manner, may perhaps one day exact it. (Agitation.) The sitting was here suspended for a quarter of an hour. M. ROMIER, Minister of State—l have listened to the speech of M. Thiers with the respect due to one of the glories of our country, and with a deep consciousness of the difficulty of replying to it. Why in the midst of our present calm was that last word pronounced which still rings in our ears ? (Applause.) Have we so rapidly returned to those evil times when the word revolution was everyday re. peated ? This is not the first time that such words have been uttered by the Hon. M. Thiers. Long years since, in the year 1847, M. Thiers startled the country by saying— " Yes, I am a revolutionist, and I have drawn my boat so far ashore on a lofty promontory that it would be long be- The press being free in the rest of Europe, do you mean that France is to be the only nation remaining in leading strings? (Renewed interruption.) But we are told that this education is already commenced, and the Minister of State, a few days ago, informed us that two only out of 15 or 18 Parisian journals supported the Gevernment, But what is the condition of the whole of them ? They are sub- ject to receiving warnings, and, if warnings do not suffice, they may be suspended or suppressed. The press having _ _ _ the right of criticising the Government, it is right the Go, vemment should have the right of declaring what amount of criticism it will tolerate ? Is that the way to commence she education of the country ? lam told also of the license of the press. Bat have yon, yourselves, suppressed that license! Have you not rather made a deposit of it in the hands of the Government to be used against any citizens fore the tide could reach it. The revolutionary wave did rise, however, and the monarchy whose memory you have recalled was swept away. (Movement.) But those days have long past, and I will not dwell on them, The speech you have just heard presents three principal features. M Thiers first made a declaration of principles, then gave a rapid history of liberty under preceding Governments, and lastly, stipulated the conditions under which he would fain see the present Government placed. 1 he declaration of principles I accept in its fullest extent. National sovereignty, order, and liberty have been our principles, not only since the 24th November, but from the day on which the representative monarchy was constituted under Napoleon 111. (Hear, hear.) With regard to the retrospective history of pre. ceding Governments, I will freely confess that Napoleon I. did concentrate in his person all the powers of the country, and that he really intended to restore to France her public liberties. I need not say why those intentions were never realised. Then came another dynasty. What caused that to fall? Was it owing to an attempt to maintain the principle of divine right as supe rior to that of national sovereignty ? Or because the in cessant attacks of the press drove it to violate the charter ? will only say that the influence of the press at that period was immense, that it created terrible embarrassments for the Government, and that we are bound to profit by the lesson. Then came the monarchy of July, which also fell, overwhelmed by the vice of its origin and its accumulated faults. Next we had the Republic, which I will pass over in silence. Lastly:came 18:52, when order was restored, and liberty, as you say, postponed. Is that your opinion of the constitution which saved the country from anarchy ? The prince who traced its bases had studied the successive falls of preceding governments, and established it on your three principles—national sovereignty, order, and liberty. The government founded in 1852 was a representative and de mocratic monarchy, with universal suffrage for its base. The powers in the State were duly balanced, and all con flicts between them rendered impossible. Senate was made powerful by its permanence,the Legislative Body was vested with powers as complete as practicable. It voted taxes, dis cussed laws, and had the right of amending them. It there fore was not a mute body. From 1852 to 1860 the Legisla tive Body exercised a useful, not a revolutionary influence. In the change effected by the decree of Nov. 24 the Emperor only followed the tendencies of 1852. (Approbation.) Thus we see that none of the principles evoked by M. Thiers have been neglected since the nation pronounced its decision. M. Thiers, however, declares that we have not liberty enough, and that the necessary conditions for it are wanting. These conditions he states to be individual liberty, liberty of the press, electoral liberty, parliamentary liberty, and lastly, a ministerial responsibility. Let us examine these points. M. Thiers says that individual liberty is compromised by the law of general surety, but what is that law ? At first it can. tained three element* it affected political persons who had taken part in previous commotions ; it specified the offences which must be repressed in the interests of society, and it gave the Government the power of banishment and of assigning a fixed residence in France or Algeria. The first of these faculties was relinquished by the generosity of the sovereign in 1859; what is there abnormal in the second and third ? Stmh is the law of gene ral surety, a very mild measure as compared with those adopted by other Governments. Have you forgotten the exceptional laws passed after the assassination of the Duke de Berry ? Of those which you yourself introduced in 1835 after Fieschi'a attempt? I do not say this reproachfully, for rigour is necessary in the presence of great crimes. In dividual liberty is complete. Nothing but atrocious attempts to assassinate could make the Government regret its gene rosity; but, thank God, there is no want of vigilance, and Providence protects us. (Approbation.) I now come to the liberty of the press. That liberty exists, and is only amen able to the laws. Do not make subtle distinctions between books and journals. The revolution of 1789 was made without journals; you all know the effect produced by the pamphlet on the " Tiers-E tat." What is a journal that daily reviews all the interests of the country, if it is not a power ful machine exercising a considerable influence every day ; it is said that journals do not make public opinion, and that is true, they distort it. (Applause.) M. Grats-Bmoiel—You are talking as if we were in 1814. M. ROVIIER—What is the liberty of the press ? Where is reciprocity for the country ? Is it not a monopolised means of aggression 7—a liberty without a counterpoise, which dis turbs all the other liberties of the country. I have seen the liberty of the press doing its work and giving all honest citizens, by frightening them, the liberty of closing their shops. I do not reject the liberty of the press, but only want it to have a counterpoise ; it was the want of this that overthrew two thrones. In a country where the free exer cise of the individual will is favoured by the habits of the people, the Government has reserved to itself the faculty of giving warnings to journals, suspending and suppressing them. Is all liberty in France suppressed on that account, and does not the Government use its powers with the greatest circumspection ? The Administration only exercises a right of guardianship in the interest of all and of the Constitution. I now pass to another order of ideas, for the speech of the honourable M. Thiers seems to embrace the whole address. I will only touch briefly on the different points, for each of the questions W.' soon recur, perhaps with greater acrimony, though I hope it may not be so, as I should regret to see debates unduly prolonged, which might cause agitation in the country. I therefore come at once to electoral liberty. The hon. M. Thiers says that the suffrage was universal only when the prinCes were elected, but that it does not exist in the election of deputies, and he says this to you. What can be the object ? Can it be to paralyse the mission confided to you by the country ? (Approbation.) My explanations on this point shall be concise and frank. We have great respect for universal suffrage ; it saved France by electing the Pre sident of the Republic, by afterwards giving him a ten years' term of office, and by voting the empire. We shall therefore always regard it as a foundation of the Imperial edifice. But should the Government remain indifferent with regard to the election of deputies ? What I you will not have it designate candidates to the electors ? You would have the Government exposed to attacks on all sides without defending itself I (Approbation.) No; the Go vernment is bound to recommend candidates, and the only limits to its actions are its prudence, moderation, and morality ; it always chooses as its candidates men whose characters and qualities recommend them to their fellow citizens. It will say to the mayors and other function aries : Yon shall not use your influence against the Govern ment, either resign your offices or support the policy of the Government. Any other course could only lead to anarchy. M. Thiers has expressed his intention of making this ques tion the subject of a special debate; we will then more closely examine the principles and the conduct of the Government and the Opposition, I now come to what M. Thiers calls parliamentary liberty. That question is diffi cult to discuss. M. Thiers, from his long experience in assemblies, well knows that it is an agreeable task to tell a Chamber that it has not power enough, and ought to have the right of interpellation. But why ? when everything can be discussed during the debate on the Address, and that on the Budget. Interpellations were so frequent in the Constituent and Legislative Assemblies, that they occupied the time which ought to have been devoted to public business. (Cries of "That is true I") The Legislative Body has all the attri butes necessary for the public good, and can make its con victions triumph without the right of interpellat ion. L now come to the last thesis maintained by M. Thiers. He asserted that there can be no proper responsibility unless the ministers themselves appear in the Chamber, and he mixed up this serious question with anecdotes which it is necessary for me to notice. M. Thiers said that a decree had rendered vacant the portfolio of the Minister of State, but that another decree might fill it again to-morrow. " I have this hope," added M. Thiers, "do not deprive me of it. The Minister of State is before you, gentlemen; if his func tions have been taken from him, it is because, according to the principles and the very essence of the Constitution, a Minister cannot appear before this Assembly. The Minister of State is here only a member of the Council of State re that might displease it ? (Interruption.) M. E. PELLETe.x—The Government journals are calum platers. (Noise.) M. THIERS—It is not my wish to remind the Chamber of anything personal to myself ; I do not foster any recollec tions of what took place a few months back. People in general have short memories concerning the affairs of others —I am content that my memory should be short also, but I wish you not entirely to forget what occurred. (Laughter and signs of assent.) I pass on to the liberty of elections ; and without at present treating the question of official can dideteships, I will merely say that the Government acts in this matter as it does in the case of the press. It gives universal suffrage to the nation, but on the condition of dic tating a little the choice to be made. Great homage is paid to universal suffrage in these our times. It has been made the right divine of the epoch. An appeal is made to it whenever Sovereigns are wanted, as in Italy, Greece, and Mexico. You go on your knees before this authority ; but when it is a question of electing deputies, you tell universal suffrage it can neither read nor write, that it is oredulous and timid, and must be told what men to choose. But I shall re serve this question for another opportunity, and say a few words on the liberty of representation. I readily admit the full initiative of Government in all matters of regulation; the more so because it must be unceasingly occupied with our affairs both at home and abroad ; it is always in the spot whilst you are here only during a pertion of the 3 ea: ; and after all the initiative of the Chamber can only be the expression of a wish. But, if I concede to the Government the initiative in every thing, the Government ought to con• code to us a control over all, and the usage now prevalent in all the liberal assemblies of Europe should be restored to us. A Chamber cannot to said to possess true liberty where all questions are submitted to it by the Government only. We also ought to have the power of introducing any questions considered useful to the majority, and not thought dangerous by the Government. Here the hon, member proceeded to comment on the system of speaking ministers, arguing that it would be far better that a minister should have the faculty of explaining the affairs of his own depart ment, whether with or without eloquence ; and ha expressed the hope of seeing M. Itouher supported in the Chamber by a few more of his colleagues. He then continued—Let us rapidly recapitulate the liberties which we require. To give them to the country it will not be necessary to over throw any institutions, but only to develop those which exist. Thus, to have individual liberty, the law of public safety should be repealed ; to have the liberty of the press, two or three articles of the decree on the public journals should be altered ; to have electoral liberty, certain objection able practices should be modified ; and, to have the liberty of the national representation, the practice of interpellations should be resumed. But what is sleeve all things neces sary is the irreeponsibility of the Sovereign. I am well aware that people will say to me, "Ah ! we know you well —you want to have back that wretched Parliamentary Go vernment—that Government of rhetoricians which exhi bited during 40 years the sad spectacle of a struggle for portfolios. It may do very well for England, a nation of shopkeepers, but France does not like the squabbles of lawyers!' I wish to say a word in reply to such objections. The Government of rhetori cians I lam not very partial to the expression ; but when it is applied to such men as Gen. Foy, MM. de Sane, de Villele, de Martignac, Royer-Collard, Casimir-Perier, de Broglie, and Guizot, a man can have but one desire, via., to merit it. (Approbation.) Since then I take no offence at the word myself, neither should Ministers take offence, for they also are rhetoricians—(laughter)—you yourselves, gentle men, applaud their speeches, and you acclaim the dawn of any rising talent. But the struggle for portfolios I It will be admitted that I myself am personally disinterested in this matter. (Noise.) But where is the epoch, where the country, in which power has not been disputed ? In a tur bulent republic it is disputed in the public forum, at courts it is often the prize of secret intrigues. Was there ever an epoch grander or more glorious than that of Louis XIV ? Well, men had then to please Mme. de Maintenon I But where can power be more nobly disputed than in an as sembly of representatives of men eminent for intelligence and honourable character ? This is a glory that England guards with jealous care—she calls it the glory of Pitt and Fox. Let us be as intelligent as England, and let us not sneer at a glory which assuredly has done no harm to our country during 40 years. The boldest man that ever lived, Napoleon 1., never ventured to levy an impost without it had been voted. At present, when the country is asked to give milliards, it becomes necessary to explain the condition of the demand, and a general discussion cannot be avoided. When people have sought fir freedom under a monarchy, they have found it in one form only, viz, individual liberty, with the right of expressing their opinions, and naming delegates to discuss them with responsible Ministers under an inviolable Sovereign. The question is different with re gard to the electoral law; it may vary in some countries, and be modelled to suit the customs and manners of the populations. It is not the same for the Government, as its mechanism does not vary like the electoral law. To call this Government English is like saying that a steam engine is an English machine. Those who wake use of suchlanguage show great ignorance of past events, There is in the his tory of modern Europe three great epochs—the feudal, the royal, and the present one, which I call liberal. When the military Government of Charlemange passed into the hands of his successors, it localised itself, and gave birth to the feudal regime, which was not peculiar to any one part of Europe. When society, tired of that state of things, turned towards royal power, standing armies and parliaments were established. The same change was everywhere effected, but at different dates. When the people in their turn wished to have their part of the power, England preceded us by about a century, but the whole of Europe was anxious to follow in the same path, for England has not alone the right of enjoying freedom. If liberty is an evil, why have we expended millions and shed the blood of our soldiers to give it to Italy ? Why were those eulogiums bestowed upon Austria by the official journals when she entered on the path of constitutional governments ? We cannot shed the blood of our soldiers to everywhere establish liberty, and then hear the assertion made that it is not suited to us. (Approba tion on several benches.) If it were so, we should declare that our country labours under political incapacity, and I for my part do not accept such a declaration. A VOICE—No one accepts it, M. TRIERS —Europe envies us, and acknowledges in us genius, prudence, and good sense, and I cannot think that the nation which has produced Descartes and Bousset is unworthy of liberty. (Renewed approbation.) There are difficulties, we are told, in our situation, in our character, and in our revolutionary state. The English are said to be a calmer people than we, but that is a mistake, for Eng land is an exceedingly passionate nation. The difference between France and England is that one is a military na tion, and the other is not. In France, the Sovereign and the people alike have military pride, which with difficulty gives way ; in England the Sovereign has as much dignify as any one, but knows how to yield it at a proper time, and the people know how to wait, (Murmurs.) In France, the Sovereign, in his military pride, puts his hands on the hilt of his sword, and says, No more concessions, and the people run to arms, and, instead of those compromises which elsewhere conclude such cries, we have a battle, and, of course, victors and vanquished. Those difficulties, I repeat, are not insurmountable ; and I s a y w i t h out hesi tation that the true founder of our liberties, and that is a title which would perfectly befit the founder of a dynasty ' will be the Sovereign who shall know how to so l ve t h ose difficulties. It is said, and justly, that there are others which arise out of our revolutionary state. The French Revolution overthrew more Governments than the Eng lish one. And that can be conceived easily, as the latter only gave liberty to England, whereas the former gave it THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY EVENING, JANUARY 14, 1864. presenting the Government before you. Do you wish to now reconstitute parliamentary Government? (Cries of No, no) I really ask myself whether Ido not mistake my most sacred duty in discussing the question when the Con stitution declares that the Ministers are responsible only to the Emperor. Art, sof the fundamental compact is de clared to have fallen into abeyance because it has not been applied, that is to say, that the responsibility of the Em peror is done away with, because the Sovereign, from hav ing well directed affairs, has not incurred it. (Approba tion.) You see clearly that you return to the parliamentary regime, that you misrepresent our Constitution, which is not that Charter in which the King reigns and does not govern, where the Legislative power was paramount, and where, with great talent, portfolios were constantly con tended for. It is such a political system which during eighteen years affected the country. Two parties were in presence ; one supported M. Guizot ; who formed an inte gral part of the Government ; the other opposed, in order to take the place occupied by its adversaries. You, gentlemen, judge with disinterestedness the policy of the Government, you do not disturb yourselves with the choice made by the Sovereign. You well know that he would remove from his counsels any one who was not worthy of his confidence; you examine the affairs of the country with out partiality for any particular man, and you pronounce that great and solemn verdict which during the last ten years has caused the prosperity of France, (Approbation.) The objectiou has been attributed to us that parliamentary Government is English. and not applicable in France, but what difference does in fact exist between the two nations ? Establish in France, if you dare, that aristocratic organisa tion which forms a powerful oligarchy, dominates over all the interests of the country, and only allows of the expansion which goes to India or to China. England is an aristocratic nation, while in France our two fundamental laws are equa lity and democracy. (Approbation.) Since M. Thiers has returned into this Assembly, to bring the convictions of his whole life, and to propose to us the Constitution of 1830, I must be allowed to draw a comparison between the policy of the Government of July and that of the Emperor. The former occupied Ancona to quickly vithdraw from it, the latter emancipated Italy. The former had an Embassy at St. Petersburg, but with none of theprivileges of such an establishment. It met with difficulties in the Eastern ques tion, before which it gave way. The Emperor's Govern ment made war in the Crimea and conquered Sebastopol. The Government of July had agitatbn at home to contend with, and used every effort to stem the revolutionary cur rent which had carried it to power. No useful reform was during that time effected. The present Government has courageously made reforms—it has neither hesitated from a fear of unpopularity nor been led away by obstinate preju dices. The country is now reaping the benefits of what has been done. Let it not be forgotten that there is in those reforms something more than the commercial question. They have had the effect of habituating every citizen to a feeling of his own responsibility. They have removed him out of that tutelage which made him doubt his own strength, and prepared him for those political liberties which will be con ferred on him when the proper moment arrives. Such has been the course of the Government : first, civil liberty, then commercial liberty, which are the best prepa rations for the political liberties yon demand,but which the country is still apt to associate with the memory of the sterile agitations it so long endured. You now show your selves impatient, but we have the right to protest against that impatience, which could only have the effect of arrest ing our progress in the path of reforms. We are justified in saying, "Be patient, as the country itself is;" for the country knows that under this beneficent Government, no good idea, no useful reform, has remained sterile, and that when the proper time comes, it will enter into possession of those liberties which you demand for it. (Applause.) M. JULES FAVRE—I wish to--- The PRESIDENT—It is M. Oilivier's turn to speak, but I suppose he will give way. Mr. E. OLLIVIER signified his assent. M. JULES FAVRE—I ask indulgence of the Chamber for a few momenta. I wish, for yottr instruction, to draw a comparison between the two speeches you have heard. If these two speeches are opposed to each other, and it it is of interest to know in what way they differ, it is well to re mark that they agree on ono point, as to the perfectibility of the Constitution. The necessity of taking a step in that direction has been demonstrated in the admirable speech of M.Thiers, and promised in the eloquent peroration of the Minister of State. This point of contact beween the two speeches cannot have escaped you. M. Thiers no more wishes for a revolution than doer the Minister of State,and,on this point,the former gentleman's speech has certainly been misunderstood. (Noise.) Both admit that there is progress in our institutions, the difference being that the Minister tells us to expect it from the intelligence and good-will of the Sovereign, while M. Thiers, at the same time that he is addressing the Government, turns his eyes to the coun try as a last resort. To be gelded in our choice we must look to the nature of our institutions. I must admit indeed that the Government has entered in the path of reform, but there has been something still more liberal than the Govern ment, I mean the small group of men who have come to sit on this bench. (Noise.) Tbey have combated your argu ments, they have criticised your acts, they have made head against your contradictions and murmurs ; and the country, —that sovereign judge—hasbestowed on them its approba tion, as the vote of Paris at the last elections was unani mous. The Minister of State cannot contest those facts; to do so, or even to criticise them, would be to question the supremacy of universal suffrage. Have we not then a right to say that by the side of the sovereign power there is an other which causes its will tobe made known ? And if so, how admit with the hon. Minister that M. Thiers' criticisms were ill-founded ? Let me now say a word on the law of general safety. The Minister of State has said that it would perhaps be rash to cry out against that law at a moment when it was wanted. (True, true.) Allow me to say that the sad occurrence to which I have alluded, and which fills all honest minds with sentiments of horror and reprobation —(approbation)—that occurrence, I say, is in itself a con demnation of this law ; for, if the law could not prevent such a result, it is useless. (No, no.) I add, for the honour of our country, that amongst the individuals whose names have been mentioned, not one is a native of France. (Ap plause.) France is patient because she is strong, and it is not in her bosom that such abominable thoughts can ger minate. Respecting the liberty of the press I shall say more on another occasion, remarking only that the Minis ter of State will find it difficult to reconcile his language in the senate with that used in this place; in the Senate he eulogised the liberty of the press ; here he has called the press Satanic, and destrective of all government. I wish also to preserve a neutrality for the present on certain subjects debated by M. Thiere and the Minister, and only observe that if Governments in France have fallen in suc cession, it has been under the and when I heard the Minister of State include in the num ber weight of their own faults, the Government of July, t said to myself that he was arguing against his own thesis ; for it was not by any ex aggeration of liberty that the fuly Government fell, but by its fearing to confront it. (Much applause.) A VOICE—And the Republic ? M. FAVRE—As to the last 'words of M. Thiers, I think they have been misunderstood, They were not a provoca tion, but they will remain in th ee memory o f t he country, and pro duce their effect. (Interr upt i on.) All v i o l ence wa s far from the thought of the hon. sp ea k er ; w h a t he wished to signalise is the absolute right W hi c h you proc laim in your against yourselves. s p ee ches, but which you mutil ate in your ac t s . Well then this right will one day be turn e d The discussion was then adj ourned, an d th e proceedings terminated. 11 THE STREET TRAFFIC OF LONDON.—VatiOnS expedients have ben proposed for relieving the pressure of the street tratne of the city of London—among the more important of which are new railways, new police regulations, and new streets. The difficulty of satisfactorily solving this problem will be otvious from a mere statement of the facts of the case. On every business day in Loudon upwards of 700,000 persons enter the city by its various ap proaches, and leave it again is the evening for their homes, at the West-end, in the suburbs, or in the country. 700,000 pm:sone - represent a population equal to the whole inhabi tante of South Wales, or of the city of Manchester. Drawn up in a line, two deep, standin g close together, they would occupy an extent of over 120 miles; and ranged six deep, they would take more than 12 hours to march past a spec tator at the rate of 110 paces a minute. Of the 700,000 per sons and upwards entering and leaving the city daily (exclu sive of those entering the West-end and oth er p arts of Lon don), it was ascertai ne d by the officers of the city police, in the month of May, 1860, t hat an average o f 535,000 proceeded on foot, and 171,000 i n ve h icles, mak i ng a total of 706,000 persons. The number time to4enter the c ity every 2 of vehicles ascertai ned at the same 59,765; which, if drawn up close i n line wouldhours,occupy was : t length of about 260 miles, reaching from London to York, and extending more than 50 miles beyond the latter place. The closeness with which the vehicles follow each other in the streets may be inferred from the fact that between 10 and 11 a.m. on Wed nesday, Nov. 19, 1862 it was ascertained that the total number passing Low Church,in both directions, was 1,2.55 —of which 348 were omnibuses, 584 cabs, and 282 carts, drays, vans, and --- waggons, b es ides 41 trucks and barrows. The numbers a n d proportions of vehicles passing the same place bet ween 4 and 5 p. m . on the same day were ascertained to be as nearly as Possible the same.—Railway News. ADVERTISE XENTI—AVoid medicines: they always aggra vate chronic complaints, but Du Barry's Delicious Health Restoring Revalenth, Ara bica Food, which saves fifty times its cost in other remedies, invariably cures them, restoring perfect digestio n , strong ne rves, sound lungs, healthy liver, pure blood, refreshing sleep, functional regularity, and energy to . the most disordered' or e nfeebled. We extract a f ew out of 60,000 cu res :___ Cur e No. 58,216 or the Marchioness de Brdhan, Paris, of a liver complaint, wasting away for seven d years, debility, with a nervous palpitation all over, ba d fies,ion ' "nut ant sleeplessness the most intolerable nervous agitation, and dreadfully low a irited.—Cure No. 1,771. Lord , Stuart de Decies, Lord I: ut P ot Waterford, of many years dYsPePsia * --N n• 40,832. . ',e Fifty years' indescribable agony from dy s pep s ia, nervousness, asthma, cough, constipation,. flatulency, spasms, sickness, and and vomiting.—Maria Jolly." —Cure No. 46,270. Tdr James Roberts, of Friraley, Surrey, of thirty years' diseased . i ,s Epitting, o f blood, liver , derange . melt, and partial deafness.—Cure ' Cure No. 47,121. Miss Elizabeth Jacobs, of extreme nervousness,' indigestion, gatherings, low spirits, and nervous fancies 'Cure No. 54,810 . The Rev. Jas, T. Campb e ll , Pakenharn, Norfolk,. "of indigestion and torpi , - , dity or the liver, which had resisted all medical treatment. In tins, 1 lb., 2s. 9d. ; 21b., 4s. 6cl ; 51b., Its. ; 1 21 b ., 22 5. ; ~41b 405.-Barry Du Barry and Co., No. 77, Regent-street, London; • also Fortnum and M ason ; and all Grocers and Cbe ivasts in • every town of the United liink,rclom. SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS, TIMES.—The Opposition in the French Elective Chamber seems determined to make its presence felt. The discussio❑ on the Budget has been opened by Thiers with a speech, or what they would call in America an oration, in which he embraces the whole of the domestic policy of France, and the history of the Governments which have swayed her destinies, from the time of the First Napoleon to the present day. We never remember to have read any speech addressed to a deliberative Assembly which attempted to go over so vast a space of ground, and to exhaust subjects so important and so numerous. Like a true son of France, M. 'Tiers begins at the beginning, or perhaps a little before it. In order to form an estimate of the present political situation of France, he feels bound to investigate and deduce for himself, from principles purely abstract and a priori, the true theory of politics in general. There are three things which he considers necessary and fundamental principles of government—national sovereignty, order, and liberty; and this liberty is of five kinds—personal liberty, the liberty of the press, liberty of election, the liberty of the repre sentatives of the nation, and the liberty of debating such questions as may arise with the responsible Ministers of the Sovereign. Having provided him self with this foi midable logical apparatus—having forged with his own hand, and in the presence of his audience, the weapons which he is to employ in the conflict upon which he enters—M. Thiers sets himself to criticise the present Constitution of France, and to show that each of the five kinds of liberty of which he speaks is fettered or destroyed by the existing Constitution. The task, as may be readily inferred, is by no means difficult. It is indeed so easy that it almost seems to cast ridicule on the tremendous apparatus which is brought to bear against it. There is little need of heavy guns to overthrow a wall which is in ruins already, the reality of weakness being concealed by a rampart of pasteboard. That personal liberty is not fully enjoyed in France, even up to what M. Thiers calls the necessary point, results from the laws which were passed after the attempt of Orsini. That the liberty of the press does not exist completely is shown by the fact that the press, whose business it is to criticise the Government, is itself placed under the power of that Government to warn, to suspend, and to suppress. The reviewer must take the author into his council, criticising with the utmost impartiality, but taking care, under the heaviest penalties, to say nothing disagreeable to the person criticised. The principle is admitted, but nullified by the restraints under which it is ap plied. As regards electoral liberty, M. Thiers has the game equally in his own hands. Universal suffrage is the great resource of moder❑ times. It is permitted to decide on the fate of kingdoms and dynasties. Italy, Greece, Mexico, and France her self have received their reigning dynasties from this source. No wonder that universal suffrage is called in for the smaller business of electing the French Chambers. But when employed for this purpose it is thus addressed—" Oh, you are very respectable, but most frequently you do not know how to read or write ; you are singularly credulous, and capable of believing ell that the Opposition members tell you, so that we find it necessary to dictate your choice." The elector may elect just as the editor may criticise —that is, provided the criticism is agreeable to the Government, and provided the candidate is agree able to the prefect. As to the fourth kind of liberty, M. Thiers claims the power of introducing such questions as the Chamber pleases, instead of having its proceedings traced for it by the Government, and, meteover, that the Assembly should really have con trol over the finances and all other questions which come legitimately under its deliberations. As to the fifth kind of liberty, be asks for responsible govern ment, the abolition of the rule which vests the power of acting in one Minister, and the duty of defending what is done in another. All these things, N. Thiers thinks, might be conceded by a few alterations in law and in practice without materially alter ing the existing Constitution, and if they were con ceded he is of opinion that France would have little right to complain on the score of freedom. He deprecates any attempt to depreciate his proposals because they would bring the Consti tution into closer similarity with that of England. He says truly these are not the principles of Eng lish liberty only, but of liberty in general. The abstinence of the Executive from any interference with personal liberty, with the liberty of the Press, the liberty of election, and the liberty of free dis cussion, and the Government by responsible Minis ters which renders it possible to effect a change in administration without a revolution,—these are truly the minimum, the very smallest amount of powers and privileges which entitle a people to call themselves tree. We should not do justice to the speech which we are considering if we did not not notice that M. Thiers justifies his return to public life by the analogy of his conduct in the case of the Republic,—a form of Government which be did not approve, but under which he rendered the public essential services. He further justifies him self by reference to the concessions in a literal direc tion made by the Emperor, by the advice which he had given to his friends to take the oath of allegi ance to the existing Government, and by the con sideration that at his age, and after the posts which be has filled, he cannot he for a moment accused of any personal or selfish object. The speech of which we have just given an outline has been prepared with much care, and, if a little more senile and dif fuse than the former efforts of M. Tillers, does no discredit to his oratorical reputation. It is, per haps, difficult for us to estimate what is suited to so peculiar an audience on so special an occasion. To us it would seem that proof was wasted in demon strating that which no one can seriously doubt, and that the real question is, not whether France is in many essential respects deprived of liberty, nor yet whether that liberty can be conferred without overthrowing the existing Constitution, but rather whether liberty, to give or withhold which is at the present moment entirely is the power of the Emperor, is from his point of view, with reference to his antecedent acts and his present position, an advisable step. What use would France make of it? What profit would he or his dynasty derive from it ? Is the present negation of liberty a greater evil than the state of things which would ensue if that liberty were granted ? On this point the speech gives us no information, Such a speech, made before an Assembly which has no power, even if fully convinced, to give practical effect to its con victions, can hardly escape one of two dangers. It will either be considered as a mere exercitation, the display of a debating club, or as an attempt to rouse the passions of the people, and induce them, in the orator's own closing words, " to exact what they now deferentially ask for." Such a position is hardly suitable to the condition of the French Chambers. They exist by sufferance. All the powers they have are grants from the Emperor, which he is just as able to recall as he was to make. He may have parted with the shadow, but he has retained in all its fulness the substance of power. Even were all that M. Thiers asks for to be granted, the liberties of France would still depend on the head of the Executive, who wields a power against which no institution in France can for a moment maintain itself. The same causes which enabled the President of the Republic to sweep away the Assembly in 1851 —namely, the power of the sword and the indiffer ence of France for popular government—would make such a feat much easier in the present year. That the Emperor is under no apprehension from M. Thiers is evident from the elaborate report which his speech has received in the Moniteur ; were it otherwise, the Assembly in which that speech was delivered would probably not meet again. We ad mire the man who boldly exercises his rights in behalf of his country, but we are by no means dis posed to identify the conduct of a representative who defends established liberties with that of an orator who takes advantage of the indulgence granted by arbitrary power to assail the very insti tutions under which he exercises it. The road by which alone, as it seems to us, the French Chambers can win their way to that public estimation and confidence on which an extension of their powers can be duraWy founded is by a close attention to b us i nes s, and by showing that within their own narrow sphere they are wise and practical, rather than by any ambitious attempts to investigate the theory and revolutionise the practice of a Govern ment with which they have very little to do. POST.—The near approach of the next session of Parliament lends increasing interest to a subject, which is certain to be mooted at an early date, in connection with the naval estimates. It will be in the recollection of many of our readers that, in the committee upon naval promotion and retirement, a considerable body of evidence was taken, and various suggestions were made with respect to placing the present establishment of naval chap lains upon a more efficient footing. Of the impor tance of the office in question no one who has ever studied the interior economy of a man-of-war will entertain any manner of doubt. Paramount as the authority of the captain must and ought to be in all matters of discipline, it is hardly too much to say that the influence among men of a zealous, earnest, judicious, and well-educated Christian minister will be second only to that of the commanding officer himself. In many respects he may be more the f r i e nd of the sailors than a professional superior can or ought to be—and if he be quick and ready to seize the tnolha teenpora fandi, he will find" poor Jack" neither an unwilling nor an unmindful hearer. To those who know what sailors are it is unnece ssary to point out how often they need gni. dance and council, or how rarely, under present cire. cumstances, these inestimable blessings are practi cally attainable by them. That the present system needs change of some kind was admitted by almost every witness examined before the committee. There are three salient points which strike at once even the casual observer as crying evils under existing circumstances—these are—the absence of any superintending head in the shape of a chap' ain general ; the want of any specific official definition of the duties of individual chaplains—and the too frequent combination of the offices of chaplain and naval instructor, to the serious detriment and secu larisation of the former. The office of Chapiain- General of the Navy is no new one. So far back as the year 1812 it was distinctly pros ided for in the Regulations of the Navy, and has, in fact, fallen into disuse only at a comparatively recent date. At the time to which we refer no war rant was granted for the appointment of any naval chaplain unless recommended by the two Archbishops and the Bishop of London (through the Chaplain-General) as in every way properly qualified. In the absence of such an authority there is literally no one (for the Senior Chaplain of Green wich Hospital is for this purpose entirely useless) to whom the naval chaplain can apply, however young he may be in his profession, for counsel and advice under all circumstances, or for encourage ment and assistance in the doubts and difficulties which surround the performance of what ought to be a very arduous duty. The army has already such an official to superintend the operations of a com paratively limited number of subordinates. Of the one hundred and fifty-one chaplains at present on the Navy List but seven are permanently retired, twenty-three hold Admiralty livings or shore ap pointments connected with the navy, and the re mainder only are actively employed. Surely we shall hardly be guilty much longer of the " penny wise, pound foolish" economy of refusing to utilise and systematise the efforts of a body of paid officials for want of a suitable directing head. Again, with respect to the nature and extent of a chaplain's duties. These are supposed to be defined in the " Naval Instructions ;" but will any sailor for a moment maintain that they are either intelligible in themselves or invariably carried out in practice ? Is it not notorious that cases have occurred where, for three years, Divine service has not been once performed on board a ship upon a foreign station ? Does not every zealous chaplain complain that little or no opportunity is given to him of meeting his pro tempore parishioners in a quiet way, or of inculcat ing those sacred truth which he is bound by his ordination vows to teach always and everywhere ? As matters stand at present, the chaplain's cabin is so situated as to be neither approachable by the men nor suitable for the purposes of study and retire ment. In the sick ward, and in the sick ward alone, according to the Regulations of the Navy, can he visit in any sense that is worthy of the name, although the relaxation of the strict letter of the law by intelli gent commanding officers has been attended with the happiest effect. Lastly, out of the one hundred and 20 old naval chaplains afloat, 56 are qualified, and mostly employed, as naval instructors, an office which, except in very small ships, it is utterly im possible they can properly discharge, and which should be filled by a paid schoolmaster. The pay of a chaplain, varying: from £lB2 to £292 per annum, would in itself attract earnest men into the navy, without the additional stipend of from £9O to £l5O payable to a naval instructor, were the service placed upon a proper footing, with definite duties, and under the superintendence of a known and responsible head. In some instances it may be impossible to separate the two offices. But such cases should be emphatically the exception, and not the rule, if the interests of the service are to count for anything in the balance. As we have said before, there is no indisposition in the navy itself to the desired reform. Out of 10 witnesses examined before the committee, no less than seven were in favour of the appointment of a chaplain general if " an officer who had been a good chap lain in the navy were appointed, one who could find good chaplains, and explain to them the na ture of their duties, provided all communications to the chaplain-general should pass through the captain as at present." As it is, any influence wilich may have been acquired during a cruise is speedily neutralised when the ship arrives at Portsmouth, to pay off iu close contiguity to a sea port town which numbers among its population 4,000 of the lowest prostitutes. Every obstacle is thrown in the way of the chaplain acquiring any real control over his flock, and the result is shown in the disbursement of £B,OOO a year payable for the accommodation of patients in Hasler Hospital, admitted on this ground alone, and constituting 35 per cent. of the total number of admissions. We say nothing, in this calculation, of the large addi tional subsidies paid by the Admiralty to the local lock hospitals, a sum which, from the deficiency of regulations for its administration, is at present prat ically thrown into the sea. The naval barracks which are now in course of construc tion at our various seaports are equally in need of the agency to which we have re ferred with our sea-going vessels, and would benefit in at least an equal degree from its employ ment. In short, the case is one in which the argu ments are virtually all on one side, and in which what opposition there is is only the old story of official unwillingness to disturb the present order of affairs. The subject is one which will undoubtedly be fully discussed early in the present session, and which deserves a far larger share of the attention of the Legislature than has hitherto been bestowed upon it. The more it is ventilated, the more, we are persuaded, will the necessity of some change being made in the direction which we have indi cated become apparent to all. American Presidential Candidates. (From the New York Iribune) There is such a thing as running men for the Pre sidency, and there may be such a thing as running them into the ground. We have an illustration of these two facts in the course of a leading sensation journal of this city. Whoever will take the trouble to tarn over its files for the last three months will find that it has enforced the claims of half a dozen candidates for Presidential honours with equal zeal and sincerity, while distributing the damaging effects of its advocacy among its several favourites with an impartial hand. When we remember that during the last three or four Presidential campaigns it has supported the candidates who were defeated, and that the stunning blows they received at the polls were in exact ratio with the warmth of its advocacy, it must be conceded that its modesty in suggesting a successful name for the coming contest is as conspicuous as was its wisdom in selecting those of the past. Its embrace having always been sure destruction to the unfortunate candidate upon whom it forced its favours, one would think any soldier or civilian who might venture to aspire to the Presidential chair would, the moment it prof fered him its aid, cry out, in the words of the Spanish proverb, " Deliver me from my friends, and I will take care of my enemies." The journal in question has, with the last few months, alternately, not to say simultaneously, be stowed its laudatory commendations upon General Banks, General Rosecranz, Gen. Blair, Governor Seward, and Governor Chase, as suitable and hope ful candidates for the White House. The favourites upon wkom it has longest and oftenest poured the fulsome beslummerings are General M'Clellan and Mr. Lincoln. Now, the ex-commander of the army of the Potomac wqs the hero designed by Pro vidence to conciliate the insurgents, explode the plots of the Radicals, crush the aspirations of the irre pressible negro, and bring order out of chaos by re storing the Union and reviving the good old times when Davis and Seward hobnobbed in the Senate, and Grow and Keitt exchanged salutations in the' House. Then, scanning the dark and troubled clouds that lowered over the country, " Honest Old Abe," slow and sure, cautious and conservative, was the only man to be dreamed of for steering the ship of state through the breakers and reaching peace and prosperity by the shortest cut—" the pilot for wea thering the storm." Whoever will run over the columns of our versatile neighbours during the times of which we write—and he need not go back many weeks—will, perhaps, at the first perusal, be a little confused at the " promiscuous and worrysome way," to quote the words of Sarah Gamp, in which the names are mixed up —as, for instance, Banks and Blair, Rosencranz and Banks, Chase and Seward, Seward and Chase, M'Clellan arid Lincoln Lincoln and M'Clellan, and so on. But to ring the changes on candidates in this way is not as difficult as one would suppose. As Hamlet says, "it is as easy as lying." Having boxed the compass with its old favourites and run their names up and down the scale till they grate upon the ears of its readers, this viva cious journal now seeks a new sensation in the per son of General Grant. The furore with which it lays hold of its fresh victim indicates that its passion will not last long; though perhaps it will be protracted enough to kill off the man who could storm Fort Danelson, vanquish Sidney Johnson at Shiloh, cir cumvent Pemberton at Vicksburg, and pass un scathed through the tempest of shot and shell at Chattanooga. We have the highest appreciation of the services of General Grant. \Yo believe there can be scarcely any limit set to his powers of en- durance. And, having as much confidence in the sincerity of our contemporary as we ever had, we beg leave to assure it that there are some thin g 3 which even Ulysses S. Grant cannot survive—viz:l six articles per day in its columns in favour of his nomination and election to the Presidency. Scotland and the Shakespeare Tricentenary', Certainly Scotland ought to take the opportunity of showing her own regard for a poet whose fame is one of the noblest benefits in which the Union has enabled her to share. We are often amused to see the Nationality men here talking of our Shake speare, our Milton, &c., yet jealously claiming Burns and Scott as Scotch only, on every opportu nity all the same. The practice, however, does not come only from their natural emptiness, but is 0 . valuable because unconscious and spontineous tes' timony to the reality of those English influence s which such men often deny with their tongues. Now, Shakespeare is the very type of the highest English influence—and of just that type of it which is most wanted here. We have done nothing ill • the drama. The theatre has been injured amongst us by a narrow fanaticism. Our home literature stands lower than at any time since Robertson pub lished his first historical work. And our tendency' if we keep too much to ourselves, is to subside into a fussy and controversial provincialism, favourable only to illiterate radicalism and local bigotry. Against all this kind of thing the literature or England is our best protection, and Shakespeare 1 the greatest name in the literature of England. i f we must have a direct connexion with him, we easy remember that one of his plays was founded on an incident in Scottish history, and was perhaps sq . Bested by a passage in Buchanan; that James Boswell, the youngest son of Johnson's biogra pher, holds a respectable place among his editors; and that of editors living none stands bight° than Mr. Dyce, a Scotsman and pupil of the Edin . burgh High School. Bat these are parochial considerations ; and th e greatness of Shakespeare is that of ages, and nee tinents, and seas. Just because, however, the poet renown is unique, he ought to be honoured wit .. , 11 celebration national in extent, or none et all. " e must either leave his Scottish admirers to swell the, different currents of the great English festival er April next, or we must have a festival of our owes comprising all that is best and most brilliant in Scottish life. Anything short of that would be nn worthy of him, and discreditable to us. The g reat difficulty in the way is, of course, the want of leader" ship. We have a certain amount of notable Horn' Bat we have no men standing sufficiently b i g above the common level to compel general adhesion by the mere force of their personal initiation of all project. The want can only be supplied by a 00- operation more zealous, hearty, and self•sacrifie ing than is found elsewhere. Whether this is P ° . ° ; sible in our divided society, and fragmentary Pub li e life, is a question of interest from more than c/ e point of view.—Edinburgh Courant. COUNTRY MARKETS. .1 LYNN—TUESDAY. re3' The weather is now mild, the frost having disapPeitAth At to-day's market there was a fair show of w heat, ' , id. an inactive sale, and the prices of last week unchostat Malting and grinding descriptions of barley sold at fori prices. Beans and peas were also supported. to 3S O White .. 43s to 45s j Barley ...... ..... 34s 3 . 2 j Itcd .. 39s to 41s I Grinding .. 30s t° o is Beans New 35s to 37s I Peas ..... .18: t t ° o ..,,,' 0 MELTON MOIVERAY—TUESDAY. whegt! The following were the currencies :—New whi . to t oe, 40s Od to 44s Od ; new red, 38s Od to 41s per 3 6 8 ,z .. ot. ; beans, 38s to 40s:for old ; new sorts, 34s to 36s per 3 ' for barley, 36s to 39s for malting, and 28s to 30s per clr'Oi grinding; new oats, 18s „ to 23s Od per 24 stone ; old ' to 275. HULL—TUESDAY. , , p•B° At this day's market the show of English W", e-t inedt moderate, with a ready sale, and late rates were ooi_ti e l Foreign was quite as dear, but rather dull of sale. -' 3 , 6 0. maintained late rates. Bums and peas very little chant, Oats in fair demand. 0 0 Wheat.... Old white.. er Old red .... ' . 1) qr. 40s Od to 4V ea New white .. '' New red ..: " Holstein and Danish Barley.... English maltincr" 27s Od to 0. - 6cl Gnndin g ..... t: Saal and Oderbruck Grindinn 2Bs Od to 315 Od Oats English, old, 30s Od to 315 ,6 Archangel and . Rig,a, per st Osr2id to PI Friesland and Dutch . . 05124 d to Os Od Swedish and Danish Beans ....English, old, per qr 42s Od to 4 , 1 I ', ii New pigeon New tick. . 30s Od to 33 3. 0 Egyptian Peas Foreign boilers .. Grinding Tares ....Spring Indian Corn Linseed, feeding s2s Od to e 0a 4 crushing 0 ..... Linseed cakes (Hull) £9 5 0 to £0 0 9, Foreign' 4os Od to 42 6 u 641, 815 oto A 0 U Rape cakes 6 0 oto . le 0 Bones 5 5 oto 6 COAL Prices of Coal per Ton a' 8. d. MARKET. the close of the nisricet. 0, d, Byass's Bebside West Walls End. x ,22 Hartley •• • Walker Primrose 17 18 09 Heugh ....... Ships at marke st, 13 ; sold, 12. Foreign Mail Packet List. MAILS DUE. Jan' 18' . 18' Australia and Mauritius, via Southampton.•••• • Jan. 5 , via Marseilles ......... fel , * O. a drazil and Cape Verds, by British paet. ...... J a e. 0. Cape of Good Hope, Ascension, and St. Helc il ?,: • , JO' 4 4, China, Penang, and Singapore, via SouthauVw :Jan.' via Marseilles .• Falkland Islands .. .............. 1 Gibraltar, via Southampton ................. India (Calcutta), and Ceylon, via Southaruptat% via Marseilles... 50. India (Bombay), via Southampton ............. Jan' 3 , via Marseilles ............... ire!). Portugal.... .............................. Malta, Egypt, and Aden, via Southampton .... "leo' 10. via Marseilles ...... Newfoundland ............................. Oporto and Vigo U. S. and British N. America, by Brit. packet.. • • .5, by U.S. packet...:.3.o W.C. of Africa,_ Madeira, and 'lb'yenCeanrii;edi..an..P.a.c.k.e.:4siet Bahamas, via New York ..................... 1 1 ‘ Mexico. ................................. All parts of West Indies, including Chili, Peru, 1 PP California. and British Columbia.. .......... 10 1 [ADvEnvisEmErnr.]--Holloway's Existence.—This medicine embraces every ° i t a ped ere quired in a general and domestic remedy. P i lls. ttr s i b Tl i z fee te r oe re d i the foundations of disease laid by defective finuf;7o,bo,;o4 air. In obstruction or congestion of the liver, lufr ee ab , „, or any other organ, these pills are especially o . er: t otafit - fot eminently successful. They should be kept 1 0 ; # f "' ro ot , every family, as they are a medicine witlit ql eve r t eale o t t young persons and feeble constitutions. TM' j aosL r o pain or irritate the most sensitive nerves or panel' bowels. Holloway's pills are the best known and S t iela / the blood, and the best promoters of absorptio par tion, which remove all poisonous and from both solids and fluids. BROWNS.—On the 12th i l3 na ir t ,thaigt.2B, Lovnic lefl ' re' e ill : 00 6 c Hon. Mrs. George A. Browne,. of a son , .. $ 658 b ROOKE.—On the 12th inst., at 14, Talbot-sqnloq, o gardens, the wife of Douglas Parry CroolEel t o COLLET.—On the 12th • t a t 41, plOCei Fortial l--• , f wife of Mark W. Collet i , ns ieq ,of sell. ~ Af e 0 1 , - 44° FRYER.—On the 11th ink ,at ' Brighton) th ° ".. F. D. Fryer, of a son, . BucHINAN—Ross Marriages. 0 111 ~,, 31 ti c P" tat T x f ll Marylebone, Walter B. M. Buchanan, -D 9 Vit, P. —On the 12th ins ~ ~ ci . to to terrace, Edinburgh, to Catherine Constance e. , 0 1:1 daughter of the late Rev. Henry Fitzroy 11°E ~. C D tl .o o WILITE—CuPPAGE.—On the 12th inst., at Coole,c l ;get s 'to Henry William White, Egg , llth Hussars, ryobl,u'et of the late Wm. White, Esq , of t3hrubs. Floyd Car Alice Clarinda, daughter of . 'Edmund YI" Esq , of Clare-grove, co. Dublin. ,CKWITII.—On the 1 Br ßeckwith, Esq., Bu i, t• T. G . ES.—On the b llth n i.tshts.:. Deaths.. ,att CLARE.—On the 0 1 f 0 fo c th r la i - re. dens, th , , Ea ins t.. sseu ll.M.'s Mint, a , ed 89 l3tlM Jcshua Eva a t itarogate, Ge°l''' oe , Southwark, It" aged 7. i pla ce' of the Court of aYg.eeadrBB2S.ellic)r ' 11' upwards of 50 years A 40 , ati : en o s t i t n it:g to73 llii .'l l(o)93° e l:l! l 'l , . ) „,tca f EvANs.—On the iiial:iotic N o d s t r e r r s . _e 12th inst., at Gold 411,1600,iP GROSE.—On the 12th inst., Mr. John Grose, aged 3 a l' e° On the 11th ' inst. at'llaramersnith, .0100 CoP tal George Ne tiO ils IVITERHo P s, -R.N., aged 83. Cop ,ate, E L S B. G. ;',,a—teOn ottihsee,llllt.hNi.n,sta.g., eatd I7lia.roso London: Prinzed r e e r, ruhit d of No. 112, Strand, Prin s the Strand, the Prcinct of the 3aY03".4 kiddleeex —Thursday, January OF ltif3.. Th kn ri ' t ",r B a tu l r r Y i4 e rna r TE.I Nr()- / , ly ICI Itt4 Ri r Th e 4 0 1. 1 11 ;', d I. . Ch (l ee ' IT etti,„ kb 4° ° ilt 14, 8 1 .1 48r 1. :. t),Dileati rqtior , te or of Co Ilh, ‘ "er B 4 tr) 17 On tf to. d , t 4 4 ", Day- e h f IAT 71 0 4 :140k , II 'llll 4 . Old 1 3 R R I L ,rPoral eapi Do 4, I,norl/24 It n Wit ' 4 14 ' ',,e„eed '45 C aPita